US Supreme Court Halts President Obama’s Climate Change Initiative 5-4

BIG BLOW TO BARACK OBAMA’S CLIMATE CHANGE INITIATIVE …

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations that is part of his global warming climate change initiative. 27 states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab” and that the regulations would greatly increase energy costs and put some of their industries out of business.  Appellate arguments are set to begin June 2, 2016. Thankfully, the SCOTUS put a hold on anything going forward as Powerline opines, “Obama’s EPA was betting that the slow legal process would mean that they’d have a lot of things in place, and many utilities would have complied with the EPA’s dictates, before the law was settled at the Supreme Court.”

A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations, dealing a blow to the administration’s sweeping plan to address global warming.

In a 5-4 decision, the court halted enforcement of the plan until after legal challenges are resolved.

The surprising move is a victory for the coalition of 27 mostly Republican-led states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab.”

By temporarily freezing the rule the high court’s order signals that opponents have made a strong argument against the plan. A federal appeals court last month refused to put it on hold.

The court’s four liberal justices said they would have denied the request.

The plan aims to stave off the worst predicted impacts of climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions at existing power plants by about one-third by 2030.

“We disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Clean Power Plan while litigation proceeds,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a statement.Earnest said the administration’s plan is based on a strong legal and technical foundation, and gives the states time to develop cost-effective plans to reduce emissions. He also said the administration will continue to “take aggressive steps to make forward progress to reduce carbon emissions.”

STRIKE 2: Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Deals Another Blow to Barack Obama’s Executive Amnesty

STRIKE 2: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals today told Barack Obama where he can stick his pen …

Today, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States has dealt Barack Obama’s Executive order on Amnesty a tremendous blow. Two of three judges on a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in New Orleans sided on the rule of law and the US Constitution. Judges Jerry E. Smith and Jennifer Elrod both ruled and refused to lift an injunction against President Obama’s deportation amnesty and said the president’s new program, known as Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA), is a binding policy that should have gone through the usual public notice and comment period instead of being announced unilaterally by Mr. Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson late last year

A federal appeals court on Tuesday denied the Obama administration’s request to lift a hold on the president’s executive actions on immigration, which would have granted protection from deportation as well as work permits to millions of immigrants in the country illegally.

Two of three judges on a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in New Orleans, left in place an injunction by a Federal District Court judge in Brownsville, Tex. The ruling comes in a lawsuit filed by Texas and 25 other states against actions President Obama took in November. Many of the initiatives were scheduled to take effect this month.

The appeals court found that the states had sufficient legal grounds to bring the lawsuit and that the administration had not shown that it would be harmed if the injunction remained in place and the programs were further delayed.

Also denied was a request by the administration to limit the injunction to the states bringing the lawsuit. The ruling is a second setback for programs the president hoped would be a major piece of his legacy, raising new uncertainty about whether they will take effect before the end of his term and casting doubts on the confidence of administration lawyers that their case was very strong.

Remember when Obama said he didn’t have the power to pass such amnesty and then did it anyhow?

Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco Overturns Barry Bonds’ Obstruction Conviction

Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco clears Barry “Balco” Bonds obstruction conviction …

Please, even if the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned your obstruction of justice conviction,  before you start talking about justice being served, every one in America, even homers in San Francisco, know you did roids. Sorry Barry, but no one will ever consider you the MLB home run champion.

What, it was Flax seed oil

Barry Bonds was cleared of his only criminal conviction in a government investigation of steroids in sports Wednesday when a federal appeals court ruled that the former San Francisco Giants star’s “rambling, nonresponsive answer” in grand jury testimony did not amount to obstruction of justice.

In a 10-1 decision, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco overturned a jury’s felony conviction of baseball’s all-time home run leader and said there was not enough evidence to support the charge. The ruling, if it stands, means Bonds cannot be retried.

“An enormous weight has been lifted from his body and soul,” said Bonds’ lawyer Dennis Riordan. He said the prosecution “ruined (Bonds’) career.”

Bonds, 50, said in a statement, “Today’s news is something that I have long hoped for. I am humbled and truly thankful for the outcome as well as the opportunity our judicial system affords to all individuals to seek justice.”

Pregnant Sudanese Christian Woman Meriam Yehya Ibrahim Faces Death Sentence in Sudan for Converting From Islam … She Refused to Recant her Faith Declaring, “I am a Christian, and I will remain a Christian.”

TAKE A LOOK AMERICA AT THE REAL WAR ON WOMEN AND WHO IS DOING IT, HINT … IT IS NOT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, ITS ISLAM.

27 year old Meriam Yehya Ibrahim, a wife and mother expecting another child, was sentenced to death by a Sudanese court for apostasy. The Court ruled that she is Muslim because her father was Muslim, even though she was raised Christian. The court ruled she left Islam and therefore the pregnant Meriam is subject to receive 100 lashes for adultry and then be hanged.  Before imposing this heinous sentence, the court gave her an opportunity to recant her Christian faith, but Elnabi said Ibrahim refused to do so, declaring: “I am a Christian, and I will remain a Christian.”

“We gave you three days to recant but you insist on not returning to Islam. I sentence you to be hanged,” Judge Abbas Mohammed Al-Khalifa told Mrs Ibrahim, addressing her by her father’s name, Adraf Al-Hadi Mohammed Abdullah.

Mrs Ibrahim also faces a sentence of flogging for adultery on the grounds that her marriage to a Christian man from South Sudan is considered void under Islamic law. She will be given 100 lashes. Because her father was Muslim, she was considered by the court to be the same.

Oh wait Sharia law is pro-woman after all … it prohibits the execution of pregnant women. Instead, the sentence is delayed until two years after lactation. UNREAL.

Ibrahim’s lawyer, Mohamed Jar Elnabi, said that he plans to ask an appeals court to review the sentence, and could file the request as soon as Sunday. Elnabi argues that Sudan’s constitution allows religious conversion without restriction.

CNN:

On Thursday, a Khartoum court convicted Ibrahim of apostasy, or the renunciation of faith, and sentenced her to death.

Ibrahim was born to a Sudanese Muslim father and an Ethiopian Orthodox mother. Her father left when she was 6, and she was raised by her mother as a Christian.

Her lawyer, Mohamed Jar Elnabi, said the case started after Ibrahim’s brother filed a complaint against her.

The brother alleged Ibrahim had gone missing for several years and that her family was shocked to find she had married a Christian man.

Because her father was Muslim, the Sharia law court considered her to be the same. It refused to recognize her marriage to a Christian and also convicted her of adultery, with an additional sentence of 100 lashes.

The death ruling for Ibrahim drew condemnation from Western embassies in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, and international rights groups, including Amnesty International.

When are people going to comprehend that Muslim Sharia Law cares little about woman and Islam has nothing to do with freedom of religion.

“The Embassies of the United States of American, the United Kingdom, Canada and the Netherlands in Khartoum express their deep concern over the apostasy ruling handed down on Sunday in the trial of Meriam Yahia Ibhrahim Ishag,” said a statement posted on the website of the U.S. Embassy in Khartoum.

“We call upon the Government of Sudan to respect the right to freedom of religion, including one’s right to change one’s faith or beliefs, a right which is enshrined in international human rights law as well as in Sudan’s own 2005 Interim Constitution,” the statement added.

Background of this atrocity … Her own brother ratted her out, who filed a complaint against her, alleging that she had gone missing for several years and that her family was shocked to find she had married a Christian man.

Amnesty International said Ibrahim was arrested and charged with adultery in August 2013 after a family member reportedly claimed that she was committing adultery because of her marriage to a Christian South Sudanese man.

Under Sudan’s Islamic Shari’a law, a Muslim woman is not permitted to marry a non-Muslim man, thus any such marriage is considered to be adultery. The court later added the charge of apostasy when Ibrahim asserted that she was a Christian and not a Muslim.

EXIT QUESTION: WHERE IS BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA’S CONDEMNATION OF SHARIA LAW AND WHERE IS HIS OUTRAGE OVER THIS WAR ON WOMEN?

Finally After 25 Years, Michael Taylor Executed in Missouri for the 1989 Kidnap, Rape & Murder of 15 Year Old Ann Harrison in Kansas City

IT’S ABOUT TIME … GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD RUBBISH!

47 year old Michael Taylor was finally put to death and pronounced dead Wednesday, February 26, 2014 at 12: 10 a.m. at the state prison in Bonne Terre, Missouri. Taylor was executed for the 1989 rape and murder of 15 year old Ann Harrison, as the Kansas City teen waited for the school bus. 1989!!! Are you kidding that it took 25 years for the appeals process to run their course before this rapist/murder was given the death penalty? UNREAL! There is some thing serious wrong with a legal system that takes a quarter of a century to provide justice. Isn’t it amazing, sickening, that we have a system that is more concerned with how the convicted murderers die than the victim?

Om March 22, 1989 Michael Taylor and Roderick Nunley abducted Ann Harrison as she waited for the school bus in her driveway, pulled her into a stolen car, took her to a home, raped her and then fatally stabbed Harrison as she pleaded for her life. Roderick Nunley has also been sentenced to death.

A Missouri inmate was executed early Wednesday for abducting, raping and killing a Kansas City teenager as she waited for her school bus in 1989, marking the state’s fourth lethal injection in as many months.

Michael Taylor, 47, was pronounced dead at 12: 10 a.m. at the state prison in Bonne Terre. Federal courts and the governor had refused last-minute appeals from his attorneys, who argued that the execution drug purchased from a compounding pharmacy could have caused Taylor inhuman pain and suffering.

Taylor offered no final statement, though he mouthed silent words to his parents, clergymen and other relatives who witnessed his death. As the process began, he took two deep breaths before closing his eyes for the last time. There were no obvious signs of distress.

Michael Taylor

Family still struggling with Ann Harrison’s murder.

“Ann was a very loving, caring, innocent young girl. She loved her sports, she loved her music, most of all she loved her family,” her uncle Paul Harrison said.

With the killers still making headlines, the hurt is still there for the family.

“It just brings back a lot of bad memories. It’s also justice being served,” Paul said.

Of course Michael Taylor’s defense attorneys questioned the execution drug purchased from a compounding pharmacy that could have caused Taylor inhuman pain and suffering and looked for a stay. Thankfully, U.S. District Judge Beth Phillips and the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied several petitions on Tuesday night for a last minute stay or further judicial review and fustice was finally served after 25 years. However, the best rebuttal to that ridiculous comment came from Pete Edlund, the retired Kansas City police detective who led the investigation into the teenager’s death who said, “Cruel and unusual punishment would be if we killed them the same way they killed Annie Harrison. Get a damn rope, string them up, put them in the gas chamber. Whatever it takes.”

 UPDATE I: Almost 25 years later, murder victim Ann Harrison is a lasting memory.

The rest of the city may remember her as the girl kidnapped from in front of her house while waiting for the school bus.

But to her friends, who have grown into women with careers and children of their own, she is forever in their thoughts as that smiling, pretty, brown-haired girl who loved softball and music.

“Ann deserves to be remembered for the wonderful spirit that she was, and continues to be, for her family, friends and community,” said Tina Thomasee.

Next month, on the anniversary of her death, friends are planning a ceremony to commemorate her life.

Barrett and Ann shared classes. They played on the same softball team, coached by Ann’s father, and they were bandmates. Ann played the flute, and Barrett wonders if Ann would have pursued a career in music.

“She loved playing the flute,” Barrett said. “She was really good.”

Ann’s death was a life-altering event for Barrett and other children who knew her.

“It just wasn’t in my realm of possibility at that age,” she said.

Previously, they rode their bikes around the neighborhood and walked everywhere without worry.

“After that, no more,” she said. “It changed the way I think of the world.”